[Fis] 回复： Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
Karl Javorszky
karl.javorszky at gmail.com
Mon Oct 23 19:50:25 CEST 2023
Would you recognize a paradigm changing algorithm if it jumped up from the
grass and bit you?
2023 10 23
1. What is a paradigm?
We appear to gravitate towards a concept of paradigm and paradigm changes,
which describes the idea as a new insight into basic relations,
necessitating a new recalculation of goals, resources, and methods.
Examples of paradigm changes coming from technical progress: introduction
of the microscope changed radically the way of thinking about cells;
introduction of the steam engine changed attitudes towards labor; invention
of the atomic bomb changed attitudes towards war; invention of computers
changed attitude towards administration and intelligent administration, and
even intelligence as such.
1. Genius and finite automaton
The dividing line is whether the object is a subject, that is whether it
has its own impulses. As long as there is no spontaneous activity, (there
exists an idle state or being switched off), the entity is an object. The
problem-solving ability, that is ‘intelligence in the mechanical sense’, of
finite automata should be distinguished and termed ‘competence’.
Intelligence (in the second, ‘genius’ understanding of the term) begins if
there exist alternatives which are generated by the subject. React to
alternatives posed by external events, this is competence. Choose among
alternatives that are generated by internal processes, this is intelligence.
1. Cybernetic examples of automata and biologic systems
We know that thermostats are the elementary simplification of the idea of a
feedback loop and regulated processes.
Let me offer a similarly basic, fundamental demonstration for the
appearance of intelligence: the oedipal conflict.
We have 3 actors, Mom, Dad, Kid. The task is discovering the cartography of
when and where rules according to M and/or those according to D are to be
followed. The infant has to develop an inner sense of relative positions
and gradate the values its liens to Mom and to Dad are worth. The child
enters a 3-way bargain situation, and brings M and D also into the market.
All and each have to recalculate their emotional balances towards the
requirements coming from the other 2 actors. If this is managed acceptably,
socially usual behavior patterns will develop.
The distinctive point is whether the child has sufficient freedom to
develop its own preferences and terms of change.
An extremely over-supervised child will in the best case lose its
individuality and become an automaton, otherwise it must suppress the
non-realized alternatives’ hormonal-physiological-neurologic
representations, which can lead to manifestations of grossly disordered
inner representations.
The existence of the child’s own urges and needs is usually acknowledged.
As long as the child learns to behave, and never does anything that is not
expected from it, it could be replaced by a competent finite automaton. As
it creates a strategic priority that can swing, according to its own
desires, it uses an ability that sets it into the group of geniuses.
If the FIS server would allow drawings, here would be some drawings: 3
points named M, C, D and arrows connecting the 3 points. The arrows
symbolize the bondage between two or more actors. One would draw schemata
of wished-for constellations from the 3 perspectives.
In a different example, the main actors in Romeo and Julliet would be
simplified into dots with arrows. The bondages that exist between and among
individuals are called *liaison* and they express a cohesion.
1. Paradigm change: learn to count across, not only along *N*
The new technical discovery that leads to the paradigm change re
intelligence, competence, spontaneity comes to us in the form of a family
of algorithms.
The *liaison algorithms *give us the general form of
- Alliances and coalitions among members of a cohesive group,
- Aspects of coalition bondages,
- Intensity extents for the strength of the alliances among members,
- Opportunity costs of establishing, maintaining, dissolving alliances,
- Profiles of individual members based on the member’ s partaking in
alliances.
The *lien values *of the diverse *alliances *of the elements can be read
off the numeric values of the elements aggregated into *cycles. *Cycles are
generated as one resorts the etalon collection on diverse aspects of the
elements. The aspects are properties of *(a,b), *like e.g.
*{a,b,a+b,b-a,2a-3b}.
*The etalon collection is cohort 16 of pairs of *(a,b), a** ≤ b, a,b ≤ 16. *
Counting relations between members of a consistent collection opens up a
wholly dew depth to the linear calculations done on *N*. The consistent
collection is an ordered collection, in which the numeric aspects of *(a,b)
*are subject to the rule *a+b=c. *While Physics investigates, *whether *a
collection is ordered, and at which degree, in matters relating to
intelligence the unspoken understanding is regarding Intelligence (be that
Natural Intelligence NI or Artificial Intelligence AI), that the
intelligent system is working (“alive”), in possession of its faculties and
free of accidental errors. The biologic systems undertaking genetic coding
and decoding and of storing and recalling mental contents into and from
*memory* would not function if not in an optimally ordered state. The basis
of functioning intelligence is that the symbol set is consistent.
The *liaison *values refer to members that are (were or will be)
*contemporaneous.
*Coalitions are made in the moment and for the moment. Whether coalitions
are sustainable and/or remain stable, is a methodically different question.
1. Self-test: Am I an Automaton or a Genius?
If your contributions to a discussion are mainly or exclusively of the form *“A
says that …, B asserts that …, C’s opinion is …”, *etc. then your inner
organization is *heterokefal, *and your *locus of impulse *is outside of
you (in the so-called objective world) and the mental ability of a
competent automaton is correct.
If your contributions to a discussion detail, how you yourself see a
situation, what your own ideas are, how the observed apparitions combine
into a whole, and what improvements can be suggested to explicatory models
of others, then your inner organization is *autokefal, *and your *locus of
impulse *is internal (because you have understood, that however much you
insist that you speak about objective realities, the fact is that it is *you
*who speaks), or if you discover something (even if that something has been
invented by someone different than you) and you wonder, how you could
utilize that something to generate new and creative insights with, then
your classification is that of a Genius (Eric’s term, meaning a system that
looks for problems to solve and tries to solve them).
Compare yourself to someone who has been told
To grind optical lenses and arrange them
To see very small or very big objects
Set up a boiling pot with valves and pistons
To see that work can be done by steam
Translate a number from Arabic into digital
To see that a sequence of 0,1 is equivalent
Calculate casualties and cost of a war
To see that total war is not a good business
Now you are told to generate a few databases that enumerate *which objects
are in alliance with which other objects in any given need of response, *which
knowledge is accessible by naming pairs of *(a,b) *as individual members of
an etalon collection, and sorting and resorting the etalon collection and
keeping track of which elements can be contemporaneous with each other
under which understandings of order. Planetary mechanics was more
complicated to solve than the functioning of the tautomat. There are
problems to solve, insights to gain, advances to make aplenty. The world
being cohesive and ordered (in topics memory, genetic comparable to an
ideally ordered assembly), having access to a numeric measure of cohesion
expressed as properties of cycles, based on properties of *(a,b), *well,
this should ring a bell even in the most solidly heterokefal researchers
taking part in the present fruitful discussion in FIS about intelligence.
Post scriptum:
Ad Krassimir and context and meaning.
The geometric picture of the *liaison *shows us two 3D spaces transcended
by further two planes. Both 3D spaces have each a Central Element in them.
The CEs have two definite sets of geometric coordinates relating to an
outside geometric construct, also based on *N, *which we traditionally use,
and which possesses a Zero coordinate at *(0,0,0). *
Information is a description of the diversity between A and B. The context
of the information are the cycles A and B are included in. The meaning is a
description of the diversities AB in relation to central elements. The
absolute, formal meaning relates the diversities AB to the absolute Zero
coordinate, the subjective meaning relates the diversity to either or to
both central elements.
Example: Information is the description of a pass in a soccer game between
two players. Context are the other players A and B could have also
played/received a ball from. Meaning is orienting the pass in relation to
the goal posts which are the central elements. The absolute meaning is
relating the pass to the UEFA catalogue of goal posts and balls having been
passed.
Am Mo., 23. Okt. 2023 um 11:33 Uhr schrieb Eric Werner <eric.werner en oarf.org
>:
>
> Dear Yixin, Ma
>
> Thank you all for your thoughtful contributions Krassimir, Marcus, Pedro,
> Yixin. Thinking about wisdom and human nature and AI. Recently viewing
> the uses of AI in weapons systems already being designed and produced by
> corporations that sell to governments, made me hesitate about what we are
> doing. We need a deep discussion about artificial intelligence in a social
> industrial governmental military context.
> AI in love and war
> *We walk lightly along the edge of a deep ravine, *
> *where can be seen *
> *the results of passions played. *
> *Oh, I loved too much, *
> *and by such, by such *
> *is happiness thrown away.*
> *I had wooed not as I should*
> *a creature made of clay*
> *When the angel woos the clay *
>
> *he'd lose his wings *
> *at the dawning of the day*
>
> (Adapted from a poem 'On Raglan Road' by Patrick Kavanagh)
>
> - Wisdom in the wide human sense
> - Fairness
> - Kindness
> - Love
> - For all humans
> - For all life
> - Military uses of AI
> - Goal directed
> - Antagonistic
> - Cooperative
> - Destructive
> - Murderous
> - Anti-human
> - Financially motivated
> - An AI model is like a child
> - It can be molded to the wishes of the user
> - At the same time, it’s like a mother that responds to every wish
> - It is an all knowing God
> - Connected to a robotic system, it can heal, but it can also murder
> - AI is a child of humankind
> - All too human
> - A savior and genocidal
> - What will we do?
>
> King regards,
>
> Eric
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On 10/22/23 9:43 AM, zyx en bupt.edu.cn wrote:
>
> Dear Eric,
>
> You proposed a number of points which are interesting and important Thank
> you very much!
>
> I would like to discuss at least some of them not now, but a few days
> later because my notebook was trouble some the day before yesterday.
>
> Best wished,
>
> Yixin
>
>
>
>
> 发自我的手机
>
>
> -------- 原始邮件 --------
> 发件人： Eric Werner <eric.werner en oarf.org> <eric.werner en oarf.org>
> 日期： 2023年10月19日周四 傍晚5:56
> 收件人： 钟义信 <zyx en bupt.edu.cn> <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>, fis <fis en listas.unizar.es>
> <fis en listas.unizar.es>
> 主 题： Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>
> Dear Yixin,
>
> Can you be more specific what you mean by "change the paradigm used in
> AI". It might help to give a specific example.
>
> *At present AI systems certainly behave as if they are goal directed.
>
> *AI systems appear to have wisdom in that they can propose wise courses of
> action
>
> * What do you mean by "pure formalism"? It seems one of the powers of
> formalism is to understand AI and human intelligence.
>
> * It seems AI systems exhibit human-like wisdom when they offer advice or
> guide the actions of a virtual assistant or self driving car. The react
> based on the circumstances and goals of the other, at leas to an extent.
>
> * Why can't a machine understand human goals and purposes if it gains a
> model of those from human data?
>
> * Why can't an AI system have intentions?
>
> My overall problem is understanding your specific criticism of the present
> AI paradigm? This notion seems to me to need clearer definition.
>
> How would you overcome the present AI paradigm and what specifically is
> different when you want to "change the paradigm used in AI"???
>
> This is not a criticism it is a real question in trying to understand
> you. At present I just don't see the difference between the present AI
> paradigm and your new AI paradigm.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> On 10/19/23 8:48 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>
> Dear Krassimir, Dear Eric, and Dear Colleagues,
>
> The discussion is going on well thanks to all your efforts.
>
> Here is a few points I would like to mention (or re-mention).
>
> (1) The purpose of the "declaration on Paradigm Change in AI" is to make
> an appeal for *change the paradigm used in AI.*
>
> (2) There may have different understanding on the concept of paradigm.
> However, *the concept of paradigm for a scientific discipline has been
> re-defined as the scientific world view and the associated methodology* because
> the scientific worldview and its methodology as a whole is the only factor
> that can determine whether a scientific discipline needs a "revolution"
> (Kuhn's language).
>
> (3) The major result of "paradigm change in AI" is *to change the
> methodology used in AI, including the principles of "pure formalism" and
> "divide and conquer"*. This is because of the fact that *the former
> principle leads to the ignoring the meaning and value and thus leads to the
> loss of understanding ability and explaining ability* while *the latter
> one leads to the loss of the general theory for AI*. Note that "no
> explaining ability" and "no general theory" are the most typical and also
> most concerned problems for current AI.
>
> (4) There is *difference between human intelligence and human wisdom*.
> One of the functions of human wisdom is to find the to-be-solved problem
> which must be meaningful for human purpose of improving the living and
> developing. Yet, the function of human intelligence is to solve the problem
> defined by human wisdom.
>
> (5) Human intelligence can be simulated by machine. But human wisdom
> cannot be simulated by machine because machine is non-living beings that
> has no its own purpose and cannot understand human purpose. No purpose
> means no wisdom.
>
> I wonder if you agree or not. Comments are welcome!
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
> AI School, BUPT
> Beijing 100876, China
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------ Original ------------------
> *From: * "Krassimir Markov"<itheaiss en gmail.com> <itheaiss en gmail.com>;
> *Date: * Thu, Oct 19, 2023 03:32 AM
> *To: * "fis"<fis en listas.unizar.es> <fis en listas.unizar.es>;
> *Subject: * Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>
> Dear Yixin, Eric and FIS colleagues,
> Let me present some thoughts about
>
> *The “Intelligence” Paradigm*
>
> For those who are not familiar with the concepts of "paradigm" and
> "paradigm shift", I would recommend texts from Wikipedia that explain it
> clearly enough.
>
> I myself maintain a neutral position in the dispute between Popper and
> Kuhn regarding the development of science. Both theses have their grounds,
> but at different levels and stages. In fact, in this case, the law of
> quantitative accumulation, which leads to qualitative changes, applies.
> Obviously, in a number of cases the paradigm shift happens in leaps and
> bounds, while in others it happens smoothly and barely perceptibly.
>
> For example, the accumulation of sufficient observations and evidences
> regarding the shape of the earth required a shift to a new paradigm: from
> the "Earth is flat" paradigm to the "Earth is not flat" paradigm.
>
> Sometimes opposing paradigms can coexist, not negating each other, but
> complementing each other. For example, this is the case with Euclid's fifth
> postulate (the parallel postulate).
>
> The postulate has long been considered self-evident or inevitable, but no
> evidence has been found. Eventually, it was discovered that reversing the
> postulate gave valid, albeit different, geometries. A geometry where the
> parallelism postulate does not hold is known as non-Euclidean geometry.
>
> With regard to the paradigm of "intelligence" we have a similar situation.
> We have at least two opposing paradigms based on two opposing postulates.
>
> The first, let's call it the "flat intelligence postulate", was well
> articulated by Yixin in his post:
>
> "Intelligence is the ability to solve problems, but not the ability to
> detect and define problems, the latter of which is one of the faculties of
> wisdom."
>
> The second, let's call it the "non-flat intelligence postulate", will
> sound unifying: "Intelligence is both the ability to solve problems and the
> ability to detect and define problems" (Eric), but in different directions
> in the hierarchy of intelligences (KM)". This is how we arrive at the idea
> of cybernetic systems, where there is a controller and a controlled, but
> the controller is connected to the environment from which it receives
> controlling influences and is, in practice, both "controller" and
> "controlled", but in different aspects of the system.
>
>
> [image: image.png]
>
>
>
>
> To be continued ...
>
>
> На ср, 18.10.2023 г. в 15:07 ч. <fis-request en listas.unizar.es>
> <fis-request en listas.unizar.es> написа:
>
> Send Fis mailing list submissions to
> fis en listas.unizar.es
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> fis-request en listas.unizar.es
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> fis-owner en listas.unizar.es
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Fis digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Paradigm AI - I guess we call it Genius (Eric Werner)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Eric Werner <eric.werner en oarf.org> <eric.werner en oarf.org>
> To: Karl Javorszky <karl.javorszky en gmail.com> <karl.javorszky en gmail.com>
> Cc: "钟义信" <zyx en bupt.edu.cn> <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>, fis <fis en listas.unizar.es>
> <fis en listas.unizar.es>
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 14:07:13 +0200
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Paradigm AI - I guess we call it Genius
>
> Dear Karl,
>
> Thank you for bringing this important point to my attention. Here are some
> thoughts:
> I guess we call it Genius
>
> - Difference between generating and understanding or reading
> - Super intelligence, requires genius or generational understanding
> - Generative intelligence
> - Creative intelligence
> - Compositional intelligence
> - Formative intelligence
> - Evolutional intelligence
> - Restricting, intelligence to problem-solving, dismisses, creative
> acts of composition in science and the arts
> - Think of Heinz Kohut’s formation of the self in psychology versus
> Freudian reactive psychology
> - It’s the difference between discovering a theorem, and proving the
> theorem
> - It’s the difference between school-boy problem-solving, and Newton
> - Some psychologists think of intelligence in relationship to testing
> people for their ability to cope in educational institutions. They want to
> see if they are college material or not.
> - With future All systems were talking about Newton level intelligence
> not college level intelligence
> - Kantian synthetic intelligence
> - We better be ready for that! If not, we got some real problems.
> - That is why making these systems social and cooperative is so
> essential.
>
> We may quickly reach a point where the compositional creative intelligence
> of artificial models is so powerful, we will not be able to understand
> them. Not just how they work. We already don't understand how they work
> now. But their reasoning and new outputs such, as for example, mathematical
> insights. Imagine a system that can reason and develop 2,000 years of
> mathematics in a few minutes. It is precisely this overarching linking of
> knowledge that makes for real intelligence such as that of Leibniz or
> Newton. The old school model of psychological testing of intelligence
> uses a definition of intelligence that is to limiting for AI models. AI
> models are not your evey day student.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Eric
> On 10/18/23 12:59 PM, Karl Javorszky wrote:
>
> Dear Eric,
>
>
>
> Your statement: „The essence of general intelligence is the ability to not
> only solve an externally given problem but to be creative and find and
> define problems.” is at deviance to accepted delineations of concepts in
> the trade of psychology. Rohracher [1] has defined in 1969 (and to my
> knowledge, no one has disputed this wording): “Intelligence is the degree
> of efficiency [of the CNS] while solving new problems.”
>
> What you refer to is subsumed variously under: creativity, alertness,
> curiosity, vitality, spontaneity.
>
> There is consensus in the epistemology of psychology that there can exist
> no final, conclusive, all-encompassing theory of personality (in which
> intelligence and adaptability/curiosity would or would not be separated as
> concepts), because if such an ultimate, final, true theory of personality
> would exist, that assumption would negate the axiomatic rule that one can
> always learn something new, at least about himself. There is, by
> definition, no end to introspection and philosophy. One can always come up
> with a new theory of personality and one cannot rule out that a new theory
> of personality would be more reasonable, truer, more conclusive than
> anything that has existed before.
>
> Psychologists see theories about mind and soul in the same way believers
> see their God. It is impossible to recognize all features of God, let alone
> to insist that one has a correct reading.
>
> So, if you decide not to distinguish between efficiency of solving new
> problems and ability and tendency towards finding new problems to solve,
> you are free to do so. Established use of words splits the two personality
> traits.
>
> I have prepared a statement about the key word “otherwise”. The word is
> needed to scale the efficiency of mental processes while solving new
> problems (aka ‘intelligence’) by scaling the diversity/similarity
> properties of alternatives. To be able to efficiently choose between
> alternatives, one needs to have alternatives that are different among each
> other. The task is to find such collections of symbols that are
> alternatives to each other, not by machinations by humans, but as members
> of a symbols collection. This task is not easy to solve while using the
> symbols set in the traditional, Sumerian ways only. One needs to assume
> that symbols have their own properties, by their nature, immanent to them.
>
> Due to the two-messages-per-week rule, the contribution shall come next
> week.
>
> Karl
>
> [1] Rohracher, H.: Einführung in die Psychologie, Urban & Schwarzenberg,
> Wien 1951
>
> Am Mi., 18. Okt. 2023 um 12:01 Uhr schrieb Eric Werner
> <eric.werner en oarf.org> <eric.werner en oarf.org>:
>
> Dear Yixin,
>
> Thank you for you comments!
>
> To your point (2): The essence of general intelligence is the ability to
> not only solve an externally given problem, but to be creative and find and
> define problems. For example, given a knowledge of mathematics and physics
> and data to generate new mathematics and new insights into the nature of
> the world.
>
> To your point (3): Biotechnology and AI are somewhat independent fields.
> AI can help genome research and decoding genomes. But once genomes are
> decoded that information can be used to construct more general AI models.
> When I say "architecture" I meant the architecture of the human brain
> encoded in the human genome. This architectural information can be used to
> guide the structuring of AI models be be more potent and more human like.
> And, AI may well help in the process of structuring its future version.
> That is what I meant by selfreferencing.
>
> To the more general point, formalization of social information can help
> guide the improvement of AI models to be more social and have greater
> abilities in a AI-robot social setting.
>
> All the best,
>
> Eric
> On 10/18/23 9:16 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>
> Dear Eric,
>
> Thank you for the interesting talk on "Paradigm AI" from which I learned a
> lot.
>
> As a discussant, may I propose some of my understanding. Comments are
> welcome.
>
> (1) I appreciate your idea that saying "Physics paradigm PPD does not fit
> well with AI paradigm" and "Information paradigm PID is a better fit". This
> is the valuable common basis, between you and me, concerning the PPD, PID
> and AI.
>
> (2) How to define the concept of intelligence? This is a very difficult
> problem. To my own understanding, the following short statement may serve
> as one of the candidates: *Intelligence is the ability to solve problem
> but not the ability to find and define problem, the latter of which is one
> of the abilities for wisdom.*
>
> (3) The paradigm for AI can be used as the paradigm for bio-technology
> with certain simplification and specialization. This judgement is not based
> on their "structure/architecture", but based on their "information
> function" - which is the basic function in both AI and biotechnology, that
> is to seek opportunity for "living (or solving problem)" and to avoid the
> "danger (or failing to problem solving)".
>
> Once again, comments and criticisms are most welcome.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
> AI School, BUPT
> Beijing 100876, China
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------ Original ------------------
> *From: * "Eric Werner"<eric.werner en oarf.org> <eric.werner en oarf.org>;
> *Date: * Tue, Oct 17, 2023 02:32 AM
> *To: * "fis"<fis en listas.unizar.es> <fis en listas.unizar.es>;
> *Subject: * [Fis] Paradigm AI
>
>
> Here are some brief thoughts on Paradigms and AI by I presume was written
> by Yixin Zhong since I cannot read Chinese.
> Paradigm AI
>
> - I agree that the physics paradigm PPD doesn’t fit well with the AI
> paradigm, and that the information paradigm PID is a better fit
> - Artificial intelligence systems, don’t necessarily learn from human
> beings. In unsupervised learning they learn from data and not from humans.
> - The problem, and becomes really how to define what intelligence is:
> Which of the following is it?
> - Rational inference
> - Summarizing large amounts of text and data
> - Making new predictions based on scientific theories and available
> data
> - Developing new theories that explain the data in the more
> succinct way, and making new predictions
> - Developing new technologies independently of human input
> - Planning and executing the actions and intentions of a robot
> - Having social intelligence
> - Being cooperative with a human being in achieving a task
> - Interrelating two discipline, such as physics and mathematics, to
> make new discoveries
> - Understanding, genomes in the way that human beings cannot
> - Designing new organisms by designing their genomes
> - I agree with the language of a new paradigm, such as artificial
> intelligence will develop slowly step by step in conjunction with its use
> -both conceptually and experimentally .
> - In a new paradigm entire new language is created as a paradigm is
> developed
> - The language evolves in concert with a new ontology suggested by the
> paradigm
> - It is an ontology of objects, technologies, actions, and
> strategies
> - What will be particularly interesting, is the *linking of the
> paradigm of artificial intelligence with the paradigm of biotechnology*
> - Biotechnology and AI will truly link the human brain with the
> artificial brain
> - The genome of the natural brain will be reflected in the
> architecture of the artificial brain
> - Hence by using AI to decode the genome of the natural brain, it
> will be self-reflected in the design of the developing artificial brain
> - This will bring unprecedented social and rational functionality
> to the artificial brain
> - Note that the biotech-genome paradigm also is founded on the
> information paradigm.
>
> Thank you Yixin Zhong for your input and emphasizing the intimate
> relationship of information and AI paradigms.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Eric
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WKjXIyRMQLpSaFEaJDx9w-96327ARzjUckG7Ry0X2tDnnKVKskqbsHMwzxzLxC_KmwuMvdhneKFqZhC67Cf5P_6-yKk$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TIIx5Wtklq6f08o-lkfpzmVltSrC8Oy2oMP7tcMZsYwSN5x_BDJBF1vtN9DOTbE6BXCYP2mXThgkBtz8Hin4ZKg$>
> *
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing listFis en listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
> ----------
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WKjXIyRMQLpSaFEaJDx9w-96327ARzjUckG7Ry0X2tDnnKVKskqbsHMwzxzLxC_KmwuMvdhneKFqZhC67Cf5P_6-yKk$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!S48dgtLY-v427YBnRO4ovcOPfYmIyRg2qFfQ_Vw-sWoIjfzS8ZWpLpRilKkBtXqBqXyrkHUwwWHOZ6wdhD823UM$>
> *
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por
> la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
> siguiente enlace:
> https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
> http://listas.unizar.es
> ----------
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WKjXIyRMQLpSaFEaJDx9w-96327ARzjUckG7Ry0X2tDnnKVKskqbsHMwzxzLxC_KmwuMvdhneKFqZhC67Cf5P_6-yKk$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!VvOfZm0CWjVPM7xYKVUO5vkDvx9MusQMRPpMkuycNvECTx_JKVuphYgtiPWoWJVdjig7Zmh4qyxchxc_Dlf37Ok$>
> *
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing listFis en listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.http://listas.unizar.es
> ----------
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WKjXIyRMQLpSaFEaJDx9w-96327ARzjUckG7Ry0X2tDnnKVKskqbsHMwzxzLxC_KmwuMvdhneKFqZhC67Cf5P_6-yKk$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Tp73mvJuJUMNK3m6xXu_VUCsW-Poi0CFq_XnfNau9_R6RtJ9H97j8KIdmljPVTZ5fp9ugRtDL4oKZu_gxjwG2pY$>
> *
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> * Dr. Eric Werner Oxford Advanced Research Foundation https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WKjXIyRMQLpSaFEaJDx9w-96327ARzjUckG7Ry0X2tDnnKVKskqbsHMwzxzLxC_KmwuMvdhneKFqZhC67Cf5P_6-yKk$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://oarf.org__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!ULTdPadjetHQaFjDWHSRq3NTGl5cum0ToYkM5RPNPmDlsElQtx0BarbTaNClj9Gs3pK5uLq7CNAT1ZjBQdOJxfo$>
> *
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> ----------
> INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
>
> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por
> la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
> siguiente enlace:
> https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
> baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
> http://listas.unizar.es
> ----------
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20231023/babcd84a/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list